What impact will the OFT have?

Twinkly

techspec wrote: »

My friend today claimed just 12 months charges, because he already had them statements, and did not want to wait for the bank to send the rest, in case the OFT spolied things in the meantime.

This post illustrated my point made previously perfectly. There is a wealth of advice on the OFT subject, not just on this site, that people are just not reading and making considered action upon.

MSE_Martin

This is a very strange discussion that seems to be going round in circles.

My explanation is all in the original post. The sooner people start the process the better - because it is likelier to make it easier to get a full pay out. It's as simple that.

No where do I say "you wont get a payout if you wait" and I've been very careful with my wording in all the quotes I give to the papers (that doesn't mean its been correctly reported, but there's little I can do about that)

The answer is simple. Start the process as soon as possible, and it should be easier to get a full result. Simple as that.

Martin

feedering

MSE_Martin wrote: »

This is a very strange discussion that seems to be going round in circles.

My explanation is all in the original post. The sooner people start the process the better - because it is likelier to make it easier to get a full pay out. It's as simple that.
Martin

Why, this ruling makes no difference at all. This is the problem that quote above.
Claims should be started as soon as possible for the simple reason that the SoLA allows 6 years. Not because of some ruling by the toothless OFT. The OFT ruling will only mean that the charges will be reduced to their ruling limit. It does not make them lawful.

The answer is simple. Start the process as soon as possible, and it should be easier to get a full result. Simple as that.

On what basis will it be easier Martin?

Simple: you've a better chance of getting most/all of your money back with less hassle by acting now. Though it doesn't stop reclaiming, even if you don't do it now."

Again on what basis and why most/all ?? You will get all your money back as the charges are unlawful. The only reason you will not is if you choose to accept less.

ukmonkey

Edinburghlass wrote: »

Sadly there is so much third hand wrong information going around

Yes, and much of this is being caused by Martin himself in my, and a lot of other people's opinions.

All was fine and dandy when he simply referred people to the experts (https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk) but now he is trying to cash in on the campaign, he is spreading misinformation.

esmerellda

Lol...to be fair to Martin I think he is trying to correct his error and has since indicated that in fact the OFT announcement won't have much effect at all on reclaiming.

What will effect claims is if a bank stands up in court and PROVES the true cost of individual breaches of contract....but even then they will have to prove it in every case within the small claims court as precedents can't be et... so keep at it

feedering

ukmonkey wrote: »

Yes, and much of this is being caused by Martin himself in my, and a lot of other people's opinions.

All was fine and dandy when he simply referred people to the experts (https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk) but now he is trying to cash in on the campaign, he is spreading misinformation.

I agree whole heartedly.

Twinkly

I guess no one actually reads his signature which states

"Martin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance."

I was under the impression this site and this forum were a team effort to help people, I've seen such great information given time and again by the same few people and with such patience. It is very sad to see Martin judged so harshly. If nothing else the awaited OFT decision has certainly whacked the hive hard.

ukmonkey

esmerellda wrote: »

Lol...to be fair to Martin I think he is trying to correct his error and has since indicated that in fact the OFT announcement won't have much effect at all on reclaiming.

What will effect claims is if a bank stands up in court and PROVES the true cost of individual breaches of contract....but even then they will have to prove it in every case within the small claims court as precedents can't be et... so keep at it

Oh he is indeed beginning to backtrack, unfortunatley, he has a long way to go yet.

I met up with my best mate the other night, we don't see each other as much these days. After I managed to claim back c£2.5k from First Direct last May, I tried talking him into claiming his charges back. Now he's a cracking lad, but not the brightest bulb in the box, and suffers from the "can't be bothered with the hassle" syndrome.

Now, the other night, he told me that is sister was claiming her back, but that she'd told him she had to be quick about it and she'd only get back the difference between whatever the OFT says and what she was charged.

I wonder where this misinformation came from?

Now, have the template letter been corrected on here? I mean in relation to the deadlines given. If not, and if they only stated 14+7 days still, then there's potentially going to be some people losing their cases on a technicality.

Now the chances of this happening are VERY slim, but ask yourself, is it worth risking for the sake of waiting another week, which is what you should as set down by the Civil Procedural Rules, which states that you must allow a month for settlement before taking it to court.

Take what Martin says about this issue with a pinch of salt please people, and remember that you can rely on the advice given by the experts at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk - a site which Martin used to endorse and support, a site that wrote an article for Martin's site as he felt they were better placed to explain the issue and the steps needed.

Now that the campaign has taken off even further (mainly thanks to Martin I should add, which is great), he is now wanting to "cash in" by being the "celebrity face" of the campaign. Mind you, at least he's not doing unsecured loan ad's, so we can't whinge too much I guess!

The number of posts I see on here from people desperate for help, which have had no reply is phenomenal, Martin would be helping the public more by advising them to join the CAG website and use that for their claim advice.

Just my opinion (although I know a lot of others share the same thoughts as I), and no doubt Martin will either jump on this post and deny all I've said, or the post will be deleted of censored.

nickmack

ukmonkey wrote: »

Now, have the template letter been corrected on here? I mean in relation to the deadlines given. If not, and if they only stated 14+7 days still, then there's potentially going to be some people losing their cases on a technicality.

Now the chances of this happening are VERY slim, but ask yourself, is it worth risking for the sake of waiting another week, which is what you should as set down by the Civil Procedural Rules, which states that you must allow a month for settlement before taking it to court.

Although the chances of being pulled up on this are small, I agree the timescales should be changed to 14+14 as they have always been on the CAG. I'm sure this suggestion has been taken on board and looked at.

Take what Martin says about this issue with a pinch of salt please people, and remember that you can rely on the advice given by the experts at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk - a site which Martin used to endorse and support, a site that wrote an article for Martin's site as he felt they were better placed to explain the issue and the steps needed.

Pretty harsh I feel. This is a not a competition for users between the CAG and MSE. People should get advice where they feel comfortable.

In my opinion, CAG is a more 'hardcore' forum and many users are the forefront of pushing banks and reacting to every suprise they spring. People hopefully come here because they can ask seemingly simple questions and get advice without being flamed.

Now that the campaign has taken off even further (mainly thanks to Martin I should add, which is great), he is now wanting to "cash in" by being the "celebrity face" of the campaign. Mind you, at least he's not doing unsecured loan ad's, so we can't whinge too much I guess!

I agree Martin has done a great job of getting this issue into the media. I don't see where you're going with the 'cash in' comment. It seems somewhat contradictory to praise the awareness raised and then critisise for being a 'celebrity face'. Many people have been made aware because of Martin's TV and other media appearances, who probably wouldn't have otherwise. This is what he does for a living, but I don't see this as cashing in, maybe you can elaborate?

The number of posts I see on here from people desperate for help, which have had no reply is phenomenal, Martin would be helping the public more by advising them to join the CAG website and use that for their claim advice.

It gets very busy on here (partly because of the media attention) and most questions are answered. To say the number with no reply is 'phenominal' is sensationalist at best. I sense you wish Martin to close down this forum and direct everyone to the CAG. As I said before, I'm not sure why some are seeing this as rivalry, maybe you would care to explain?

ukmonkey

@NickMack - why, in the "early days" did Martin simply direct people to CAG, which he supported as mentioned before. Now that the campaign has gathered pace, Martin has decided to no longer pass people on to CAG, though I believe he does still link to them in places.

Why the change?

Before it was a case of Martin saying "These are unlawful, I'm not an expert on claiming them back, these guys are, so go and see them".

Now it's a case of "I like to think I'm an expert on claiming them basck, so I'm no longer going to just recommend people use CAG, instead I'm going to setup in competition against them and give you some information on my site for you to usse".

Yes, this is Martin's site for him to do with as he pleases.

With regards to wondering why the competition between MSE and CAG, perhaps you should ask Martin this??

There is a common cause here, but why oh why does Martin just not carry on directing people to CAG as before. It always worked well in the past, but now that things are working like this, misinformation and panic is being spread (although the panic, by Martin's own admission, inadvertantly).